Suing casino
August 2nd, 2013 at 7:05:39 AM
permalink
Hi all,
Ive filed a claim against a casino based in the UK for breach of contract. Basically the dispute arised because the casino sent me a bonus with the terms 40x deposit bonus but when I claimed the bonus it was 40x deposit and bonus. I only discovered this after doubling the bonus up. The casino admits the email contained a mistake but refuses to honour the terms unless my balance is reset. I dont think this is fair and have requested from the court the theoretical amount (Expected value) I would be left with had I wagered 40x deposit. My question is can I have some ideas about how to best present this arguement to a judge. I need the judge to understand that my strategy is a two tier approach of bet big first then grind out for the win.
Thanks!
Ive filed a claim against a casino based in the UK for breach of contract. Basically the dispute arised because the casino sent me a bonus with the terms 40x deposit bonus but when I claimed the bonus it was 40x deposit and bonus. I only discovered this after doubling the bonus up. The casino admits the email contained a mistake but refuses to honour the terms unless my balance is reset. I dont think this is fair and have requested from the court the theoretical amount (Expected value) I would be left with had I wagered 40x deposit. My question is can I have some ideas about how to best present this arguement to a judge. I need the judge to understand that my strategy is a two tier approach of bet big first then grind out for the win.
Thanks!
August 11th, 2013 at 5:40:46 AM
permalink
Thanks for all the input.
August 11th, 2013 at 6:05:34 AM
permalink
Quote: 3dfellaThanks for all the input.
What do you want us to say? You didn't post a question.
Fighting BS one post at a time!
August 11th, 2013 at 7:31:10 AM
permalink
Heck, If I don't understand what the dispute is after reading this guy's post, how is the Judge going to understand it.
What were the words of the email. One Line
What should they have been. One Line
Was this an obvious error that you should have realized or was this an error which you simply and rightfully concluded was a very good deal and wanted to avail yourself of? Yes/No?
Can you submit a list of similar recent offers from a variety of casinos that are equivalent or near to your interpretation of the offer so as to prove that your receipt of the email should not have put you on notice of any sort of error? Yes/No.
What is the dollar amount involved based on the actual deposit that you made?
How is that calculated?
Courts, particularly English courts, are reluctant to award theoretical losses based on bets you might have made.
Up to the time they notified you of the different interpretation, what was your actual out of pocket loss?
Why is it unfair to allow the casino its corrected version of the offer?
What did you do under your interpretation that you would not have done under their interpretation?
What were the words of the email. One Line
What should they have been. One Line
Was this an obvious error that you should have realized or was this an error which you simply and rightfully concluded was a very good deal and wanted to avail yourself of? Yes/No?
Can you submit a list of similar recent offers from a variety of casinos that are equivalent or near to your interpretation of the offer so as to prove that your receipt of the email should not have put you on notice of any sort of error? Yes/No.
What is the dollar amount involved based on the actual deposit that you made?
How is that calculated?
Courts, particularly English courts, are reluctant to award theoretical losses based on bets you might have made.
Up to the time they notified you of the different interpretation, what was your actual out of pocket loss?
Why is it unfair to allow the casino its corrected version of the offer?
What did you do under your interpretation that you would not have done under their interpretation?
August 11th, 2013 at 8:05:51 AM
permalink
English courts - as I understand them - mandate that a plaintiff who loses his civil claim must pay the defendant (here, the casino) its attorney's fees if the plaintiff loses the case. In America, this is generally never the rule.
Good luck, I have concerns for you.
Good luck, I have concerns for you.
August 11th, 2013 at 8:14:23 AM
permalink
Quote: midwestgbEnglish courts - as I understand them - mandate that a plaintiff who loses his civil claim must pay the defendant (here, the casino) its attorney's fees if the plaintiff loses the case. In America, this is generally never the rule.
Good luck, I have concerns for you.
If the Plaintiff's claim is deemed frivolous enough, then the defendant can file what is called a, "Motion for Sanctions," seeking same.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
August 11th, 2013 at 9:38:19 AM
permalink
I think of the old Flag pole scenario.
I'll give you one hundred dollars to climb to the top of that flagpole and kiss the big brass globe.
...Okay. (Proceeds to climb flagpole.... but when about ten feet from the top hears bellowed from below: I REVOKE MY OFFER).
This seems to be the same thing: the casino amended the terms of their email, but in the interim, the recipient never climbed the flagpole, got hot and sweaty, exerted effort and incurred risk in reliance on it, etc., but now wants to complain to the Judge, well IF I had climbed the flagpole my theoretical losses would have been 'x', so pay me my theoretical losses instead of any actual losses.
And he wants this in an English court no less!
Sorry.... either I'm missing something critical here or that proverbial snowball in hell is indeed in a better situation.
I'll give you one hundred dollars to climb to the top of that flagpole and kiss the big brass globe.
...Okay. (Proceeds to climb flagpole.... but when about ten feet from the top hears bellowed from below: I REVOKE MY OFFER).
This seems to be the same thing: the casino amended the terms of their email, but in the interim, the recipient never climbed the flagpole, got hot and sweaty, exerted effort and incurred risk in reliance on it, etc., but now wants to complain to the Judge, well IF I had climbed the flagpole my theoretical losses would have been 'x', so pay me my theoretical losses instead of any actual losses.
And he wants this in an English court no less!
Sorry.... either I'm missing something critical here or that proverbial snowball in hell is indeed in a better situation.
August 11th, 2013 at 10:14:53 AM
permalink
Are you guys for real? "Basically the dispute arised because the casino sent me a bonus with the terms 40x deposit bonus but when I claimed the bonus it was 40x deposit and bonus" Whats unclear about that? Standard cast iron bait and switch. How can that not have been explained clearly enough for you? Ever hear of anticipatory breach?
August 11th, 2013 at 10:16:28 AM
permalink
"My question is can I have some ideas about how to best present this arguement to a judge. I need the judge to understand that my strategy is a two tier approach of bet big first then grind out for the win. "Quote: Beethoven9thWhat do you want us to say? You didn't post a question.
sorry must learn to post a big red hand pointing to my question.
August 11th, 2013 at 10:17:19 AM
permalink
Quote: FleaStiffI think of the old Flag pole scenario.
I'll give you one hundred dollars to climb to the top of that flagpole and kiss the big brass globe.
...Okay. (Proceeds to climb flagpole.... but when about ten feet from the top hears bellowed from below: I REVOKE MY OFFER).
This seems to be the same thing: the casino amended the terms of their email, but in the interim, the recipient never climbed the flagpole, got hot and sweaty, exerted effort and incurred risk in reliance on it, etc., but now wants to complain to the Judge, well IF I had climbed the flagpole my theoretical losses would have been 'x', so pay me my theoretical losses instead of any actual losses.
And he wants this in an English court no less!
Sorry.... either I'm missing something critical here or that proverbial snowball in hell is indeed in a better situation.
Yes youre missing everything. I paid money to climb the flagpole and the casino didnt revoke anything - they promised something and gave something else. Additionally, having accepted the offer by attempting to climb the flagpole the offer could not be revoked so its a very bad example.
August 11th, 2013 at 10:23:27 AM
permalink
OP:
The only viable question is: "What does your attorney say?"
Surely you have an attorney.
If not: you'd damn well better get one.
You are out of your element.
The only viable question is: "What does your attorney say?"
Surely you have an attorney.
If not: you'd damn well better get one.
You are out of your element.
"What, me worry?"
August 11th, 2013 at 10:25:55 AM
permalink
If you want ideas and are posting in a forum about Las Vegas, it might be a good idea to sketch out same basic information like are casinos there regulated, and by whom? Is the regulation anywhere close to being effective? What are the strictures against false advertising? Does the regulator regularly penalize casinos for such violations or infractions? Can typical cases subsequently move to the court system?Quote: 3dfella"My question is can I have some ideas about how to best present this arguement to a judge. I need the judge to understand that my strategy is a two tier approach of bet big first then grind out for the win. " sorry must learn to post a big red hand pointing to my question.
August 11th, 2013 at 10:26:04 AM
permalink
No im not out of my depth. I need Math help not legal advice. I didnt ask anyone for advice on the law although I welcome input.
August 11th, 2013 at 10:29:02 AM
permalink
Quote: 3dfella"My question is can I have some ideas about how to best present this arguement to a judge. I need the judge to understand that my strategy is a two tier approach of bet big first then grind out for the win. "
sorry must learn to post a big red hand pointing to my question.
Did you edit your OP? I don't recall that statement being there before.
Fighting BS one post at a time!
August 11th, 2013 at 10:29:24 AM
permalink
no.Quote: Beethoven9thDid you edit your OP? I don't recall that statement being there before.
August 11th, 2013 at 10:31:48 AM
permalink
I think you did. In any case, most people who are serious about a lawsuit seek assistance from an attorney, not random people over the internet who live in another country.
Fighting BS one post at a time!
August 11th, 2013 at 10:34:01 AM
permalink
Quote: 3dfellaNo im not out of my depth. I need Math help not legal advice. I didnt ask anyone for advice on the law although I welcome input.
I can't believe more people are not sympathetic to your cause here, you are totally in the right and they are in the wrong. That said, you presented your situation rather poorly here. I am not an attorney, but here is my advice. Stop playing at the casino. Try to cash out however much money you feel you are entitled to. They will deny it on the basis that you need to wager X $'s more in order cash out the bonus. Sue them for the amount you are entitled to and demand that they simply pay out what you are owed. "Your honor, they sent me an email that said I could cash out the bonus once I had wagered 40x the bonus. I got a $100 bonus and wagered $4000, now they are refusing to honor their offer." Let them try to explain that they changed the terms to the judge. Should be a winner.
Vote for Nobody 2020!
August 11th, 2013 at 10:35:21 AM
permalink
Thats exactly what Ive done, thanks. I just need to show the judge how much I would expect to be on IF I had completed the offered wagering requirement of 40x.
August 11th, 2013 at 10:38:19 AM
permalink
No I didnt, you didnt read it properly. It was the whole reason I posted here. Did you think I just posted to tell you? FYI attorneys advise on the law, not Math.Quote: Beethoven9thI think you did. In any case, most people who are serious about a lawsuit seek assistance from an attorney, not random people over the internet who live in another country.
August 11th, 2013 at 10:44:21 AM
permalink
Quote: 3dfellaThats exactly what Ive done, thanks. I just need to show the judge how much I would expect to be on IF I had completed the offered wagering requirement of 40x.
Let me see if I understand. Pretend the bonus was 100% you deposited $100, and broke even. You started with $100 + $100 bonus and wagered $4000. Now your balance is $200 and they are saying you need to wager ANOTHER $4000 before you can cash out the $100 bonus, is that right?
Vote for Nobody 2020!
August 11th, 2013 at 10:47:54 AM
permalink
I deposited 500 and got 500 bonus. I turned this 1k into 1900 after wagering 900. I have 39100 left to wager instead of 19100 I should have.Quote: bigfoot66Let me see if I understand. Pretend the bonus was 100% you deposited $100, and broke even. You started with $100 + $100 bonus and wagered $4000. Now your balance is $200 and they are saying you need to wager ANOTHER $4000 before you can cash out the $100 bonus, is that right?
August 11th, 2013 at 10:48:00 AM
permalink
Quote: 3dfellaNo I didnt, you didnt read it properly. It was the whole reason I posted here. Did you think I just posted to tell you? FYI attorneys advise on the law, not Math.
Nah, I read it properly (before you edited it, that is).
Fighting BS one post at a time!
August 11th, 2013 at 10:49:38 AM
permalink
I didnt edit it so you cant have read it properly. The question was always there. Im sure the admin can verify the post wasnt edited.Quote: Beethoven9thNah, I read it properly (before you edited it, that is).
August 11th, 2013 at 10:50:52 AM
permalink
Ok then you really don't have a very good case. Wager the other $19100 and then demand the money and if they will not give it to you sue them. The theoretical value argument is not gonna fly.
Vote for Nobody 2020!
August 11th, 2013 at 10:53:09 AM
permalink
Thanks but I DONT need legal advice. This is anticipatory breach and I have already spoken to a solictor.Quote: bigfoot66Ok then you really don't have a very good case. Wager the other $19100 and then demand the money and if they will not give it to you sue them. The theoretical value argument is not gonna fly.
August 11th, 2013 at 10:56:10 AM
permalink
Nah, I still think you edited it. In any case, it's no biggie since you have bigger fish to fry. After hearing all the facts regarding your situation, it doesn't sound like you have a very convincing case. You should feel lucky that you're $1,400 ahead.
Fighting BS one post at a time!
August 11th, 2013 at 10:59:48 AM
permalink
shows what you know, reallyQuote: Beethoven9thNah, I still think you edited it. In any case, it's no biggie since you have bigger fish to fry. After hearing all the facts regarding your situation, it doesn't sound like you have a very convincing case. You should feel lucky that you're $1,400 ahead.
August 11th, 2013 at 11:01:29 AM
permalink
Quote: 3dfellashows what you know, really
Is this how you're gonna act in court? lol
Fighting BS one post at a time!
August 11th, 2013 at 11:02:09 AM
permalink
No only with you.Quote: Beethoven9thIs this how you're gonna act in court? lol
August 11th, 2013 at 11:03:57 AM
permalink
That's good, wouldn't want to see you lose.
So have you visited Goodshooter.com? They should have some good advice for you there.
So have you visited Goodshooter.com? They should have some good advice for you there.
Fighting BS one post at a time!
August 11th, 2013 at 11:11:11 AM
permalink
I'm guessing that when you say "My question is can I have some ideas about how to best present this argument to a judge" you live in the UK and are using the small claims court.
A court where you represent yourself and the costs are minimal.
If so, do you know anyone who is knowledgeable on the math in question as you are allowed an expert to present evidence.
How the judge is to be convinced that you suffered a real monetary loss is a tough one I'm sure if your case is based on a theoretical amount.
Still, in many small claims cases the other side never even shows, maybe you will get lucky.
A court where you represent yourself and the costs are minimal.
If so, do you know anyone who is knowledgeable on the math in question as you are allowed an expert to present evidence.
How the judge is to be convinced that you suffered a real monetary loss is a tough one I'm sure if your case is based on a theoretical amount.
Still, in many small claims cases the other side never even shows, maybe you will get lucky.
A photon without any luggage checks into a hotel, he's travelling light.
August 11th, 2013 at 11:11:39 AM
permalink
yep thats it.
August 11th, 2013 at 11:23:22 AM
permalink
Probably unwise to jump in here, but what the heck. I am not a math guy or a lawyer, so my take only. From what you have said:
1. You deposited the money under one understanding of return.
2. You haven't yet reached the cashout point you understood necessary, but somehow became aware in the interim between non-refundable deposit and now that the terms were different than you understood.
3. You want the casino to pay you what you think you theoretically should have earned had your betting system been carried to the first cashout point.
4. Your betting system is such that betting $900 in one lump/large increments is preliminary and not indicative of your future typical bet, but your betting record to date would not support that claim with a track record.
5. The casino presumably makes you expose 40x your bonus (if your first understanding of terms is correct) in order to allow the house edge to do its job and take your cash, but you haven't played to the point where you can prove by doing it that you can beat the house.
My conclusions:
1. The only way I could see a judge even looking at this for more than 5 seconds is if you had hit your first cashout point with a positive balance before approaching him/her.
2. The math guys on here believe in the math; they say (again and again ad infinitum) no system works on any game with -EV in the long run, only variance can help you in the short run, which you are now experiencing. There is no math that will help you make your case, because the math says your risk of ruin is too high to support a theoretical positive result after 40x bankroll exposure. Possible? Yes. Likely? Emphatically no.
3. Without a track record on the casino site that demonstrates your entire betting system in play, what you were going to do is completely irrelevant. What you did so far is the whole story for any legal recourse.
JMHO. YMMV. Good luck with it.
1. You deposited the money under one understanding of return.
2. You haven't yet reached the cashout point you understood necessary, but somehow became aware in the interim between non-refundable deposit and now that the terms were different than you understood.
3. You want the casino to pay you what you think you theoretically should have earned had your betting system been carried to the first cashout point.
4. Your betting system is such that betting $900 in one lump/large increments is preliminary and not indicative of your future typical bet, but your betting record to date would not support that claim with a track record.
5. The casino presumably makes you expose 40x your bonus (if your first understanding of terms is correct) in order to allow the house edge to do its job and take your cash, but you haven't played to the point where you can prove by doing it that you can beat the house.
My conclusions:
1. The only way I could see a judge even looking at this for more than 5 seconds is if you had hit your first cashout point with a positive balance before approaching him/her.
2. The math guys on here believe in the math; they say (again and again ad infinitum) no system works on any game with -EV in the long run, only variance can help you in the short run, which you are now experiencing. There is no math that will help you make your case, because the math says your risk of ruin is too high to support a theoretical positive result after 40x bankroll exposure. Possible? Yes. Likely? Emphatically no.
3. Without a track record on the casino site that demonstrates your entire betting system in play, what you were going to do is completely irrelevant. What you did so far is the whole story for any legal recourse.
JMHO. YMMV. Good luck with it.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
August 11th, 2013 at 11:34:48 AM
permalink
Thanks. Ive actually asked for specific performance if the judge cant calculate damages. I can show that Ive made hundreds of thousands by two tier betting so I do have a track record of hitting a target then grinding.
August 11th, 2013 at 11:46:42 AM
permalink
I would wager the remaining $19100 according to original terms and then request a cashout quoting the offer. If they refuse then take it to small claims court. The fact that you have 1900 balance is no quarantee that you won't lose it all in next $19100 wagering, especially if you have to play slots. Is this the case?
August 11th, 2013 at 11:47:44 AM
permalink
sigh.
August 11th, 2013 at 12:28:22 PM
permalink
Quote: 3dfellaAre you guys for real? "Basically the dispute arised because the casino sent me a bonus with the terms 40x deposit bonus but when I claimed the bonus it was 40x deposit and bonus" Whats unclear about that? Standard cast iron bait and switch. How can that not have been explained clearly enough for you? Ever hear of anticipatory breach?
So is this:
There is some undisclosed "deposit bonus"... they are willing to pay "Forty times the deposit bonus" but you want them to pay "forty times the sum of your deposit and bonus''.
Frankly, I'll admit that some people on this thread seem to understand what you are saying... so I hope you find a like minded judge. Don't expect to submit a mathematician's analysis though... if you can't make it clear to the judge, you won't win.
August 11th, 2013 at 2:08:14 PM
permalink
The casino arent willing to pay anything. The 40x refers to wagering. I can see now that it isnt as clear as it should be.
August 11th, 2013 at 4:07:46 PM
permalink
I say if they have a free play casino do exactly what you were planning on doing a few times record it and show the judge. You could use other free play casino's as well. Certainly the judge wont watch evry hand but you can fast forward. Then show the math.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
August 11th, 2013 at 5:50:02 PM
permalink
Are those sizable winnings taxable?Quote: 3dfellaI can show that Ive made hundreds of thousands by two tier betting so I do have a track record of hitting a target then grinding.
August 12th, 2013 at 5:21:11 AM
permalink
why would they be?
August 12th, 2013 at 6:02:13 AM
permalink
What game are you playing and what is your betting strategy?
I heart Crystal Math.
August 12th, 2013 at 7:02:32 AM
permalink
In the U.S. gambling winnings, especially larger ones, are taxable. If they are not taxable in the U.K., that means that you would not be able to proffer official documentation of your typical winnings.Quote: 3dfellawhy would they be?
August 12th, 2013 at 7:09:15 AM
permalink
Of course I would. Bank statements, transaction logs immediately spring to mind.
August 12th, 2013 at 7:38:03 AM
permalink
Quote: SanchoPanzaAre those sizable winnings taxable?
Gambling winnings in the UK are not taxable. Same in Canada. If a UK or Canadian citizens wins big in Vegas, they are do not have to pay US income tax on the winnings. Though often there are some hoops to jump through to get the full amount.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
August 12th, 2013 at 7:54:38 AM
permalink
Quote: thecesspitGambling winnings in the UK are not taxable. Same in Canada. If a UK or Canadian citizens wins big in Vegas, they are do not have to pay US income tax on the winnings. Though often there are some hoops to jump through to get the full amount.
Unfortunately for Canadians, this is not true. Canadians must pay 30%, and may file a tax return if they can substantiate losses to offset those winnings.
UK citizens, on the other hand, owe nothing.
I heart Crystal Math.
August 12th, 2013 at 8:18:17 AM
permalink
Quote: CrystalMathUnfortunately for Canadians, this is not true. Canadians must pay 30%, and may file a tax return if they can substantiate losses to offset those winnings.
Thank you, I was misinformed. Clearly this changed in 1996 (http://www.ustaxrecovery.ca/articles/treaty.html - commercial blog post, but gives the outline)
US winnings are subject to a 30% tax, but you can claim back documented losses as a tax refund.
However, Canadian winnings are still tax free, as long as the player is not a professional gambler (and the bar for that is quite high)
Quote:UK citizens, on the other hand, owe nothing.
I will ensure I claim any winnings as a British Citizen not a Canadian Tax Payer (like I'll ever need to).
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
August 12th, 2013 at 9:00:58 AM
permalink
To summarize:
1. You had ($500 deposit + $500 bonus) = $1000 to start.
2. Initially your interpretation was that you had to wager $500 (bonus) x 40 =$20,000 at which point you could cash out every dollar in your account.
3. You wagered $900 and won and your balance is now $1900.
4. Under your interpretation you now have to wager $19,100 before cashout, under the casinos modified ruling you have to wager $39,100 before cashout.
Frankly I think you have a lot of legal problems in your argument (offer subject to change, their definition of “40x bonus” may mean 40x total which is spelled out in the fine print, etc.) but you only asked about presenting the math.
I’d present it as such: Currently in my account I have $1900, which I would have wagered at $25 (or other small amount) per hand until I cleared the remaining $19,100 and then I would have cashed out everything. The house edge for the game is 0.5% (determine and prove the actual) per hand, therefore, I should have expected to lose = $19,100 x .005 = $95.50 in meeting the wagering requirement leaving me with $1804.50 to cashout. By refusing to let me complete the casino has caused me to suffer damages of $1,804.50 or ($1304.50 if they gave you your original $500 back). Alternatively, if the casino claims you can complete the bonus at the $40,000 requirement you may have to argue for this specific performance and state that by doubling the wagering requirement you are expected to lose an additional $20,000 x .005 = $100 which are your damages caused by changing the requirement from $20,000 to $40,000.
If you have a judge willing to listen the damages aspect of your case is quite provable. If the casino argues, or the judge asks, how you know your damages you say “I can’t be sure because the casino has not allowed me to complete the contract, but by the math I’d expect to lose $95.50 the actual results would likely be different but this is the best estimate”. You never need to prove your losses exactly in court, you need to provide evidence that its more likely than not that you would suffer the damages you allege.
1. You had ($500 deposit + $500 bonus) = $1000 to start.
2. Initially your interpretation was that you had to wager $500 (bonus) x 40 =$20,000 at which point you could cash out every dollar in your account.
3. You wagered $900 and won and your balance is now $1900.
4. Under your interpretation you now have to wager $19,100 before cashout, under the casinos modified ruling you have to wager $39,100 before cashout.
Frankly I think you have a lot of legal problems in your argument (offer subject to change, their definition of “40x bonus” may mean 40x total which is spelled out in the fine print, etc.) but you only asked about presenting the math.
I’d present it as such: Currently in my account I have $1900, which I would have wagered at $25 (or other small amount) per hand until I cleared the remaining $19,100 and then I would have cashed out everything. The house edge for the game is 0.5% (determine and prove the actual) per hand, therefore, I should have expected to lose = $19,100 x .005 = $95.50 in meeting the wagering requirement leaving me with $1804.50 to cashout. By refusing to let me complete the casino has caused me to suffer damages of $1,804.50 or ($1304.50 if they gave you your original $500 back). Alternatively, if the casino claims you can complete the bonus at the $40,000 requirement you may have to argue for this specific performance and state that by doubling the wagering requirement you are expected to lose an additional $20,000 x .005 = $100 which are your damages caused by changing the requirement from $20,000 to $40,000.
If you have a judge willing to listen the damages aspect of your case is quite provable. If the casino argues, or the judge asks, how you know your damages you say “I can’t be sure because the casino has not allowed me to complete the contract, but by the math I’d expect to lose $95.50 the actual results would likely be different but this is the best estimate”. You never need to prove your losses exactly in court, you need to provide evidence that its more likely than not that you would suffer the damages you allege.
August 12th, 2013 at 9:34:00 AM
permalink
Thanks. Ive taken legal advice and this is an anticipatory breach. Im watertight on the terms and the wagering requirement. Its solely about showing how much I would be left with after wagering 19100 and proving I wont lose everything!
August 12th, 2013 at 10:05:19 AM
permalink
Quote: 3dfellaBasically the dispute arised because the casino sent me a bonus with the terms 40x deposit bonus but when I claimed the bonus it was 40x deposit and bonus. I only discovered this after doubling the bonus up. The casino admits the email contained a mistake but refuses to honour the terms unless my balance is reset. I dont think this is fair and have requested from the court the theoretical amount (Expected value) I would be left with had I wagered 40x deposit.
Quote: 3dfellaI deposited 500 and got 500 bonus. I turned this 1k into 1900 after wagering 900. I have 39100 left to wager instead of 19100 I should have.
Okay, suppose the house edge on your handle is 1%, just to make things easy. You can adjust up or down as needed based on your chosen wagering activity. Your argument is basically "I deposited 500 on the understanding that I would have a 20000 playthrough requirement to receive an extra 500, and since that has a -200 expectation, I stood to gain 300 in theo. However, the casino really meant a 40000 playthough requirement for a -400 expectation, leaving me with a 100 theo win. So I want them to pay me 200."
Except if you play a good game at, say, 0.25% edge, then your delta is smaller. 0.25% of 20000 is a loss of 50 so my theo was 450, but on 40000 is a loss of 100 so my theo was 400. That's a difference of 50. Presumably you're not going to court to argue over 50 quid. Or are you?
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
